Search

Background The incidence of Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC), a rare form of skin cancer with a poor prognosis, has increased in Italy in recent decades. Avelumab, an anti-programmed death ligand 1 monoclonal antibody, is approved for the treatment of metastatic MCC (mMCC) based on the results of the phase 2 JAVELIN Merkel 200 trial. The global avelumab expanded access program (EAP) was designed to provide compassionate use of avelumab prior to approval for patients with mMCC who had limited treatment options. We report findings from a subgroup of Italian patients enrolled in the avelumab EAP. Methods Eligible patients had mMCC and progressive disease following ≥ 1 prior line of chemotherapy or were ineligible for chemotherapy or clinical trial participation. Patients received avelumab 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks. Treating physicians were provided with an initial 3-month supply of avelumab; resupply was permitted if the patient achieved a complete response, partial response, stable disease, or other clinical benefit per physician assessment. Safety and efficacy data for the EAP were reported at the treating physician’s discretion. Results Between April 1, 2016, and September 14, 2018, 109 requests for avelumab were received from Italy, and 102 were approved. All but 1 of the approved patients had received ≥ 1 prior line of therapy. At data cutoff (March 22, 2019), 95 patients had been supplied with avelumab and response data were available for 55 patients. The objective response rate in response-evaluable patients was 29.1%, including 6 patients (10.9%) who achieved a complete response and 10 patients (18.2%) who achieved a partial response; in the total population supplied with avelumab (n = 95), the proportion who had an objective response was 16.8%. The median duration of treatment in responding patients was 9.7 months (range, 3.5–41.7 months). The most frequently reported treatment-related adverse events were infusion-related reaction (single preferred term; n = 3 [3.2%]) and pyrexia (n = 2 [2.1%]). Conclusions Results from Italian patients enrolled in the avelumab EAP are consistent with the findings of the JAVELIN Merkel 200 trial and confirm the efficacy and safety of avelumab treatment in this population.

Incidence rates of Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC), an uncommon skin cancer with an aggressive disease course, have increased in recent decades. Limited treatment options are available for patients with metastatic MCC (mMCC). Avelumab, an anti-programmed cell death-ligand 1 monoclonal antibody, became the first approved treatment for mMCC after the results of the phase 2 JAVELIN Merkel 200 study. Prior to its regulatory approval, an expanded access program (EAP) enabled compassionate use of avelumab in patients with mMCC. Here we report findings from patients enrolled in the EAP in Europe and the Middle East. Efficacy and safety data were provided at the discretion of treating physicians. Between March 2, 2016, and December 22, 2018, 403 requests for avelumab were received from 21 countries, and avelumab was supplied to 335 patients. Most patients (96.7%) received avelumab as second-line or later treatment. In 150 patients for whom response data were available, the objective response rate was 48.0%, and in responding patients, median duration of treatment was 7.4 months (range, 1.0-41.7 months). The most common treatment-related adverse events were infusion-related reaction (2.4%) and pyrexia (2.1%), and no new safety signals were observed. Overall, results from European and Middle Eastern patients enrolled in this EAP confirm the efficacy and safety of avelumab treatment observed in previous studies in patients with mMCC. ispartof: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER vol:149 issue:11 pages:1926-1934 ispartof: location:United States status: published

BackgroundAvelumab, a human anti–programmed death-ligand 1 immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody, showed favorable efficacy and safety in patients with metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma (mMCC) in the phase II JAVELIN Merkel 200 trial, leading to approval in multiple countries. We describe real-world experience with avelumab in patients with mMCC from an expanded access program.MethodsEligible patients had mMCC and progressive disease during or after chemotherapy or were ineligible for chemotherapy or clinical trial participation. Patients received an initial 3-month supply of avelumab (administered as 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity); resupply was allowed following complete response, partial response, stable disease, or clinical benefit per physician assessment.ResultsBetween December 15, 2015, and March 4, 2019, 558 of 620 requests from 38 countries were medically approved, and 494 patients received avelumab. Among 240 evaluable patients, the objective response rate was 46.7% (complete response in 22.9%, including 3 of 16 potentially immunocompromised patients), and the disease control rate was 71.2%. The median duration of treatment in evaluable patients with response was 7.9 months (range, 1.0–41.7) overall and 5.2 months (range, 3.0–13.9) in immunocompromised patients. No new safety signals were identified. The expanded access program closed for new requests on December 31, 2018, as required after regulatory approval; benefitting patients continued to receive avelumab.ConclusionsThe avelumab expanded access program for patients with mMCC demonstrated efficacy and safety in a real-world setting, consistent with the results from JAVELIN Merkel 200, and provided a treatment for patients with limited options.

The influence of age (70 years and ≥70 years) was retrospectively studied on the quality of life (QoL), incidence of side effects (including skin reactions) and efficacy of chemotherapy plus cetuximab in patients with KRAS wild type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).225 patients of the Observed study (PS 0-1) were retrieved based on age (70 and ≥70 years) and evaluated through EORTC QLQ-C30 and DLQI questionnaires.The two patient groups (141 70 and 84 ≥ 70 years, respectively) were balanced with no differences in any of the clinical and pathological characteristics considered. Both groups underwent similar type of first-line chemotherapy plus cetuximab, treatment duration and compliance. Cetuximab therapy caused similar incidence of side effects and impact on QoL in older and younger patients. No difference was observed in progression free survival (PFS) and in disease control rates between the two patient populations. Median overall survival (OS) was higher in patients70 (27 months, 95% CI: 22.7-31.27) than in patients ≥70 (19 months, 95% CI: 14.65-23.35) (p = 0.002), which is likely due to higher proportions of metastatic resection (27.0% vs 8.3%; p = 0.001) and utilization of second-line therapy in younger group (58.9% vs 42.9%; p = 0.028).The current data suggest that fit older patients with mCRC can be safely treated with a cetuximab-based therapy, as QoL and safety profile do not seem to be affected by age. In addition, age did not impact the choice of chemotherapy to be associated to cetuximab and treatment compliance.

Context Chronic pain increases with age, and in the elderly, comorbidities and polypharmacotherapy make the choice of treatment for pharmacological pain control a complex matter. Objectives We conducted a multicenter, prospective, observational study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the buprenorphine transdermal delivery system (TDS) in elderly patients with chronic noncancer pain. The aim was to assess the cognitive and behavioral status of patients during treatment. Methods The study included 93 patients (69 women and 24 men); the mean age was 79.7 years, and in most cases, the pain was due to osteoarthritis. Almost three-quarters (74.2%) of the patients had suffered pain for more than 12 months. The treatment was buprenorphine TDS, starting from a dose of 17.5μg/h. Outcomes were assessed using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the 17-item Hamilton Depression scale (HAM-D 17), the Neuropsychiatric Inventory, the Barthel Index, the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12), a verbal numeric rating scale, and the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS). Results Buprenorphine treatment was associated with a decrease in pain severity without negative effects on the central nervous system. On the HAM-D scale, there were reductions in both the psychological and somatic scores. On the MMSE, values at the beginning and end of the study were comparable. Evaluation by SF-12 showed improvements in physical and mental status. CIRS values at baseline and at the end of the study were superimposable, indirectly confirming the tolerability and safety profile of the drug. Conclusion Our experience confirms the analgesic activity and safety of buprenorphine TDS in the elderly. There was an improvement in mood and a partial resumption of activities, with no influence on cognitive and behavioral ability.

Cetuximab improves efficacy when added to chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Effective management of skin reactions from cetuximab improves quality of life (QoL), and treatment compliance in clinical trials. No data are available from real‐world settings. The ObservEr observational, multicenter, prospective study evaluated QoL, the incidence of skin reactions, and management of chemotherapy plus cetuximab in first‐line for mCRC. The primary endpoint was QoL measured with the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and EORTC QLQ‐C30. Secondary endpoints were the incidence of skin and serious adverse events, median overall and progression‐free survival, tumor response, and resection rates. Between May 2011 and November 2012, 228 patients with KRASwt mCRC were enrolled at 28 Italian centers, 225 evaluable, median age 65 years. QoL did not change during treatment and was not affected by the choice of prophylactic or reactive skin management. The incidence of cetuximab‐specific grade ≥3 skin reactions was 14%, with no grade 4/5 events. Skin reactions correlated with survival (P = 0.016), and their incidence was influenced by chemotherapy regimen (oxaliplatin vs. irinotecan—Incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.72, P

Oral mucositis (OM) is an acute, severe and often dose-limiting toxicity in patients undergoing HSCT. OM significantly affects functional status and patients’ quality of life; however no effective therapy was available for this condition. Palifermin (Kepivance®) is a human keratinocyte growth factor (KGF) produced by recombinant DNA technology. KGF binds to its receptor on epithelial cells, stimulating their proliferation, differentiation, and migration. Palifermin has been shown to decrease the incidence and duration of severe OM in patients with hematologic malignancies receiving myelotoxic therapy and HSCT. In Italy, compassionate use protocols are considered EAP and are regulated by a decree issued by the Ministry of Health (MoH) on May 8th 2003. The objective of the Decree is to ensure that patients have access to experimental therapies outside clinical trials, when no valid therapeutic alternative exists. Approval is granted in case of serious or rare diseases or life-threatening conditions. After Ethical Committee (EC) approval and notification to MoH, the drug can be supplied in response to an unsolicited request from a physician. The drug is then administered under the physician’s direct responsibility. During EAP, the Decree allows collection of the patient’s data similar to an observational trial. From July 2005 through July 2006 a total of 26 centers have requested the drug and obtained approval from local EC. Each center collected the following data on a case report form: vital signs, disease status and treatment, palifermin administration, mucositis, analgesic use, parenteral supplementation, common laboratory tests and duration of hospitalization. A total of 175 adults patients with hematological malignancies treated with autologous SCT participated in the EAP. In an interim analysis, data from 41 patients (24 men; 17 women; median age 52.44) were analyzed. The most common diagnoses were multiple myeloma (MM) (n=16) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) (n=15). Conditioning therapy and supportive care were administered according to standard institutional practice (high-dose melphalan for MM and the BEAM regimen for NHL). Palifermin 60 mcg/kg/day was given intravenously on 3 consecutive days before the conditioning regimen and on 3 days starting on the day of stem cell infusion. OM was evaluated daily for 28 days after transplantation or until severe OM resolution using the five-grade World Health Organization (WHO) oral-toxicity scale. Safety was assessed on the basis of the incidence of adverse events. The incidence of severe OM (Grade 3–4) was 17% and the mean duration was 2.2 ± 3.5 days (CI, 1.1–3.3) in patients with OM Grade 0–4 while in patients with OM G3-4 the mean duration was 6.9 ± 2.5 (CI, 4.5–9.2). Adverse events (mainly rash, pruritus, erythema, mouth and tongue disorders, and taste alteration) were mild to moderate in severity and were transient. The frequency of adverse events was consistent with those observed in clinical trials. In conclusion, the Italian EAP experience with palifermin suggested that results were consistent with those of pivotal studies in patients with hematologic malignancies undergoing HSCT. From the results of the interim analysis of the Italian EAP, the use of palifermin in this setting appears to be feasible and was widely accepted by participating physicians and patients.